Frequency-Importance and Transfer Functions for the Auditec of St. Louis Recordings of the NU-6 Word Test

Abstract

Frequency-importance and transfer functions for the Auditec of St. Louis recordings of the NU-6 word test are reported. The functions were derived from the word recognition scores of 24 subjects with normal hearing who were tested under 128 conditions of filtering and talker-spectrum-matched noise. The importance function was broader and had a lower midpoint than the NU-6 importance function reported by Schum, Matthews, and Lee (1991), but still displayed a bimodal shape. The transfer function was steeper than the transfer function reported by Schum et al., but comparable in slope to the transfer function for low-context CNC words reported by Bell, Dirks, and Trine (1992). Results from a limited set of conditions presented in quiet suggest that the use of masking noise was partly responsible for the dissimilar importance and transfer functions obtained by Schum et al. and this study. Differences in the equipment used in each experiment and in the methods used to analyze the data appear to have contributed as well.

Development of the ORCA Nonsense Syllable Test

“…One should bear in mind that the hearing-impaired participants in this study were exclusively elderly individuals. For comparison purposes, we had also included in Figure 16 the transfer functions of the W-22 (Studebaker & Sherbecoe 1991), the NU-6 (Studebaker et al 1993), and the Connected Speech Tests (Sherbecoe & Studebaker 2002) scored at a word level.…”

Modern Prescription Theory and Application: Realistic Expectations for Speech Recognition With Hearing Aids

“…In other words, once SII has been approximated, then realistic expected amounts (e.g., percent) of speech recognition abilities can be predicted using previously published transfer functions. Transfer functions for two commonly used speech materials in clinical audiology are provided by (a) Studebaker et al (1993) for the NU-6 words and (b) Studebaker (2002, 2003) for the CST sentences.…”

“…To demonstrate the impact of SII values on percent correct scores for speech, transfer functions for the two commonly used speech materials in clinical audiology, that is, NU-6 (Studebaker et al, 1993) and CST (Humes, 2002;Sherbecoe & Studebaker, 2002, 2003, were used. The estimated percent correct score for each audiogram (unaided, aided with DSL m[i/o], and aided with NAL-NL2) is plotted as a function of the 0.5 -, 1 -, 2-kHz PTA (Figure 12).…”

“…To demonstrate the impact of SII values on percent correct scores for speech, transfer functions for the two commonly used speech materials in clinical audiology; that is, the Northwestern University-6 (NU-6; Studebaker, Sherbecoe, & Gilmore, 1993) and Connected Speech Test (CST; Humes, 2002;Sherbecoe & Studebaker, 2002, 2003 were used. Note.…”

Speech intelligibility prediction using a Neurogram Similarity Index Measure

“…An SII score of 0.5 does not translate directly to a speech discrimination score of 50%. The frequency importance and transfer functions for NU6 words were used to convert SII to word recognition (Studebaker et al, 1993) followed by a word-to-phoneme recognition transfer function (Boothroyd, 2008). Fig.…”